Do the Orthodox consider Holy Baptism to be 'indelible" (to use the Western terminology), that is once validly received it cannot be repeated? Hence the term "conditional"..

Yes it is indelible but it cannot, stictly speaking, happen outside the Church. So when someone comes to Orthodoxy various methods can be used to effect a baptism: a full water baptism or a chrismation which fills in the form of baptism from the former confession.

Some Orthodox nowadays will say that non-Orthodox baptism counts but they are in the minority and have yet to provide a coherent theology to support these ideas.

With conditional baptism, yes there is the idea that it is conditional but there is no change in the formula to my knowledge.

I have never seen any of these statements by SCOBA (not that they don't exist). Regardless, SCOBA is what it is - a conference. They're not the Church or the American uber-Synod. They don't really make binding (to use an RC word) orders or statements.

That's true...there are other jurisdictions not under SCOBA, obviously...I'm just referring to statements like this one from Bishop Tikhon of the West that make it clear that the tradition followed by the OCA (as well as the AOAA, AFAIK) -- reception by chrismation -- is the one received from Russia:

Quote

The practice of our Church, the Orthodox Church in America, and that of the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of North America ("The Metropolia"), as likewise that of the Russian Mission and Missionary Diocese and Archdiocese that preceded them, in the matter of the reception of heretics is very clear: it is the practice that obtains and has obtained in the Russian Church for centuries, at least since the time of Peter the Great.

This tradition is therefore to be the rule among parishes under the OCA. Any exceptions are to be cleared with the bishop, as your priest obviously is doing. Good for him. Sorry if I jumped on his back; I had no right to do so. Forgive me?

Quote

I think your statement of "whole parts of the OCA calling for rebaptizing" is both innacurate and an overreaction.

Wow. You are right.[/b] My apologies to everyone for that blunder. I just re-read the whole thread and nowhere was that ever said. Sorry about that.

Which leads into my question: do Orthodox ever "conditionally" baptise someone in case there is a question as to the validity of thier first baptism?

Do any of you think for one second that Christ would condemn anyone simply because they were sprinkled instead of dunked?!!!!!! It is the ACT of Baptism - the CONFESSION of belief that is important and not the specific way it was done.

I reject this teaching from any Church.

BTW - On my flight out to Sacramento from DC, I sat beside 2 Pentecostal Ukranian preachers. They have lived in the US for 15 years and we were talking about Orthodoxy. BOTH of these men REFUSED to say anything bad about the Orthodox - their reaction was "Christ tells us not to judge one another. The IMPORTANT thing is that one is a Christian"

Do any of you think for one second that Christ would condemn anyone simply because they were sprinkled instead of dunked?!!!!!! It is the ACT of Baptism - the CONFESSION of belief that is important and not the specific way it was done.I reject this teaching from any Church.

I wasn't reffering to the mode (immersion, effusion) of Baptism, I was reffering to the intention of the celebrant of the sacrament and/or the recipient. If one is baptised in a non-Trinitarian denomination, i.e. Jehovah's Witnesses, I'm not sure that baptism would be a valid Christian baptism. Other factors such as the denomination's belief re:original sin, baptismal regeneration etc would come into play in deciding if the person should have a conditional baptism.

Do any of you think for one second that Christ would condemn anyone simply because they were sprinkled instead of dunked?!!!!!! It is the ACT of Baptism - the CONFESSION of belief that is important and not the specific way it was done.

I reject this teaching from any Church.

BTW - On my flight out to Sacramento from DC, I sat beside 2 Pentecostal Ukranian preachers. They have lived in the US for 15 years and we were talking about Orthodoxy. BOTH of these men REFUSED to say anything bad about the Orthodox - their reaction was "Christ tells us not to judge one another. The IMPORTANT thing is that one is a Christian"

Tom,

Last year you said you agreed with baptizing those who did not receive triple immersion.

Yeah I actually think Christ gives a hoot that we be baptized correctly.

But that's not the point. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO with whether Christ will condemn so and so. That's his right. But we have to be faithful to what he instituted: baptism by triple immersion.

I wasn't reffering to the mode (immersion, effusion) of Baptism, I was reffering to the intention of the celebrant of the sacrament and/or the recipient. If one is baptised in a non-Trinitarian denomination, i.e. Jehovah's Witnesses, I'm not sure that baptism would be a valid Christian baptism. Other factors such as the denomination's belief re:original sin, baptismal regeneration etc would come into play in deciding if the person should have a conditional baptism.

Sorry, Crucifier -- I used your quote - but my rant was not directed at you at all.

And I DO agree that if one is baptized by what one would generally consider a non-Christian church, such as the JW's, then that is something entirely different.

My objection is to those Orthodox Priests who want to re-baptize all Protestants.

THIS IS NOT SHEDDING ROMAN CATHOLIC HERITAGE. This is making Orthodoxy BECOME MORE ROMAN CATHOLIC by accepting THEIR ideas about grace outside the Church, their ideas about baptism by pouring, etc etc etc.

THIS IS NOT SHEDDING ROMAN CATHOLIC HERITAGE. This is making Orthodoxy BECOME MORE ROMAN CATHOLIC by accepting THEIR ideas about grace outside the Church, their ideas about baptism by pouring, etc etc etc.

So in some areas the RC's are becoming more correct in their practice of Chrsitianity.

Although I was referring more to the "made up traditions" of the ancient Church. Such as the "worship" of Mary.

TomS is a friend of many of us and we are trying to patiently answer his questions. However, many of the threads are becoming bogged down because of TomS's concerns. I would therefore request that TomS start a thread in free for all called "TomS's concerns" and that he only post stuff that he disagrees with* in THAT thread for the time being.

I ask that we get back on track and not respond any more to the TomS posts in these threads.

AnastasiosADMINISTRATOR

* And of course in so doing it must be reasonable and not offensive to the Orthodox believers here.